Freebasing Information: When is soliciting an infrigement on the unconditional rights of individuals?

Islamic fundamentalists ("terrorists")
R.U.F. Rebels (former Genocidal Army)

mormon fundamentalists (polygamists)

vegans (people who do not use proctucts from any lifesource that has neurons and complex sensory systems)
Radical Sustainables (people who live entirely sustainable lives; their homes, energy and water sources are all derived from nautre's recycled properties)

The latter are just a few examples of extremists--which I'm sure we have all, at one point, judged without knowing their story or their side. We see what we want to, or what the media filters to us. The fact is, if we were to just educate ourselves about every aspect of these-understand and universally accept, but not personally accept--we would probably be a more approachable race as a whole.

A huge pet peeve of mine has always been embedded in the issue of persuasion; someone forcing thier BELIEFS on me (this is different from forcing facts). I accept all religions to coexhist in this world, and I also take interest in learning the history of various religions and cultures.

I do not, however, think it is okay for one to see me as less than they, simply because I do not choose to follow their ways, especially after I get the information they supply, yet still decide not to buy into whatever they are "selling".

I belive the closest the human race will ever come to "peace" and understanding is just the latter: we get ALL (including the 1000's of scriptures not in the bible, but that are hidden in the vatican and unable to be seen, including the positive side of something that someone is bashing) the information, and then reject but APPRECIATE the object of controversy.

As recent personal experience, I now try to see solicitors of all types in a different types.

I'm vegan, and volunteered to handout Vegan Outreach Pamplets around my university; some people just threw the pamphlets on the ground as soon as they read the cover; some left it on the handrails; and some said no.

The issue is clear: these people judged me, as well as my cause, before giving the information a chance. So, first, I would like to supply some of my background, my reasoning, and let you decide for yourself.

Let me intially begin by saying that I do not judge those who are not vegan or vegetarian. I do, however, judge people whose beliefs or moral codes conflict with the meat-eating diet they so choose, and the KNOW this, yet are too lazy to do so (there are those issues like money, etc that do makes sense. Vegan lifestyles can be especially expensive if you dont have the time to make your food from scratch). HOWEVER, in most cases, non-vegans and non-vegetarians alike do not know the truths of the animal industry, thus, I am appreciative of their lifestyles-they are ignorant, know no better, and thus are living the best life they believe they can.

I have encountered people(of both sexes) who say they "love" other species and animals, but just cannot stop eating dairy or meat products because they are "just too good". They understand the negative dialects that come with the expansion of factory farming, but choose to place their culinary tastes above the fact.

I admit that even when I was vegetarian, I heard the word "vegan" and immediately thought of an extremist. Why? I now know it is because I did not know all the facts, yet I made a judgement anyways.

Animal rights vegans (as opposed to those who choose it due to health/spiritual reasons, etc) choose their diet for the same reason as vegetarians: factory farming is exploding, especially in the U.S., and with it comes horrid animal abuse. I discovered that dairy and egg production, the animals are treated worse than those raised primarily for meat. Even on "free-range farms". On top of that, they animals are sent to the very same commerical slaughterhouses anyways, even most local, family-owned farms do this, because it is cheaper. Dairy cows end up in dog foods, processed frozen foods, etc. Layer hens show up in in dog food, pot pies, etc. because of thier cheap, stringy meat and weak muscles.

No, the abuse does not by everyONE, but it does happen everyWHERE. Kill lines cannot be stopped for animals, ever. If a worker is injured, then yes. Approx. 4 out of 10 times when the animal is boiled for hair removal, dismembered, and skinned, it is fully conscious because they are still bleeding out, were not stunned properly, or because the line moves so fast the captive-bolt used missed the integral part of the brain.

I do, however, belive that personal abuse (a worker beating the shit out of an animal, stomping on its head, clubbing it) happens MUCH more than you want to tell yourself. These people are around animals every day, and have been taught to treat them as neutral and numb machinery, and they get used to this. They get used to slitting throats, throwing around, and breaking bones to get the squirmy animals to sit still and shut the fuck up. In a way, I understand this. I do. I think of Germany and its stint with Jews and other "undesirables": they were brainwashed, they lived in a bubble and got caught up it in. These workers are no different, I believe. They are not fully at fault. It is not them I have an issue with; it is the ciriculation of information--people should know the price of their meat and scrambled eggs. If they still decide to eat after they know the facts, that is fine. Leather and fur industries are far more gruesome. Fish, dolhphin, seal, whales and sharks have even more sensitive neuroloical systems and receptors than we do, so why was I raised that they don't register what pain is? The have cognitive abilities as well; they know they are being dismembered or bled out.

Factory farmed sheds get smaller approximately every 5 years, yet the numbers of animals inside each one increases simultaneously. Three decades ago, one farm use to hold dozens of workers. Now, most only need 1 or 2 workers that simply "check up" on the animals every few days, or weeks. Everything is automated; workforce is decreased, space is decreased and the animal count is increased, all for one goal: to make. more. money.

Personally, I believe that as the dominant species, we have the ability to place reason over will. But that's not what we are doing: we are being selfish when we use animals without respect. I believe that we can use other species, but we need to do so with care, respect, and divided attention. Can we not deal with 1 serving of meat a day as opposed to 3 whoppers? Is it really THAT hard?

I often think back to early Native Americans: not only do they use every single part of the buffalo or the animal, but they held ceremonies to respect the spirit and the sacrifice of each animal they slaughtered. That, and, at least they had the fucking balls to do it themselves.

Factory farming also contributes heavily to environmental issues: waste from factory farms contributes more emissions to "global warming" than emissions that come from our automobiles.

Though minor in nature, some deforestation that occurs world-wide occurs to clear land which is used to house beef cattles. The cattle destroy the land while grazing and laying waste before slaughter, so new land must be cleared for the next batch.

Not to mention the local, permanent wildlife devastation that occurs in farming communities. Yes, it is this serious, and yes, it should surprise you. The media does not talk about this, mainly because (1) the animal industry is fucking huge in the U.S. (2) it has heavy ties within all aspects of the government, including the Senate and House. The media will rarely front-line stories that have to do with negative faces of factory farming, because many cannot afford to get slammed by the big boys.

I could go on, and on, and on about my views as a vegan. I've read books by goverment officials, lobbyists, activists, etc.

The point is not that I became a vegan, but that I respected the choice of other vegans once I saw the point for most of their reasoning. I did not have to agree with it.

Many need to understand that there is a difference between accepting an extremist view (any view, for that matter) and respecting it: one does not have to agree to respect. This may take time.

I had the same experience with several of the other extremist movements, and I feel it has opened my mind in many ways. I recently just watched the acclaimed foriegn film "Paradise Now", which delves into the world and motives of Middle Eastern suicide bombers. Before that, i have done a presentation on islamic extremeist: where they come from and why; do they see their acts the same way we see them as? Do they have different beliefs and religious preferences than us? Were they raise the same as us? What does their culture, economy, society, politics have to do with their decisions? Even before the movie, I had a better understanding of their lifestyle. They see us as we see them, to place it simply.

In terms of polygamy, I read several books and watched some documentaries (the closest I could get)--one was Under the Banner of Heaven, by the same author who wrote Into the Wild--it still made me have disgust for the fundamentalists who abused their power, but I understood them more; I understood why they would and could do it. The same goes for African rebels, government abuses (such as RUF), and many other "extremist" ordeals.

We are nothing but hypocrites when we push those away; those that are willing to give us information. Sure, it is a step far to place us in the wrong when we reject the information, but when we can respect their lifestyle but not personally accept it, they should not still slam it in our face. That is when soliciting becomes an annoying infringement on one's personal rights.